LETTERS: What about benefits to the Brown family?

Jeff Berding's guest column, "Vote defended" (Nov. 15), gave a thorough report on the benefits Hamilton County residents received from the levy to build Paul Brown Stadium. Could we have an equally thorough report on the financial benefits the Mike Brown family received by that referendum?

Jacqueline Wollman, College Hill

Big winners: Mike Brown and his compadres

I agree with Mr. Berding that The Banks, redesign of Fort Washington Way, Smale Riverfront Park and other riverfront activity are wonderful enhancements to downtown Cincinnati. But I will never be convinced that the approximate annual cost of $30 million to Hamilton County taxpayers for eight Bengals games per year is a good investment. The big winners of this bargain are Mike Brown and his compadres. Just think what could have been done with those funds to either develop the prime riverfront property on which the stadium sits, or to reduce the tax burden for county taxpayers.

Steve Engelbrecht, Anderson Township

Exploiting differences for political gain

In a recent Enquirer interview, Mayor-elect John Cranley gave the public a choice, "Riverside Park or the streetcar. Wasson Way or the streetcar." In his over-simplification, he asserts that these are insular projects. In reality, all of these projects have the potential to serve everyone who lives in the city any beyond. To suggest that one project is more valid than the other only encourages more contention, division and acrimony in our community. We are not just 52 neighborhoods; we are one city. The mayor-elect should be reinforcing this truth, not exploiting differences of geography and opinion for his own political gain.

Christine Carli, Columbia Tusculum

I-71 interchange money better spent elsewhere

The Interstate 71/Martin Luther King Jr. Drive interchange is not the best $20 million investment choice for the city. The interchange will reduce the commute time for people who have already made their home investment decisions in areas outlying Uptown. These people could not be expected to move when public funds are being expended to reduce their commute time.

The funds must be directed to the Uptown area in ways that will attract people who are making new investment decisions. The funds would be better spent extending the streetcar to Uptown. This service would enhance the vicinity of Uptown as a residential choice for those who are making the new investment decision to eliminate their motor vehicle commute altogether.

Ronald Hischak, Evanston

State rep. answers debt-settlement critic

In the letter "Don't ease state rules on debt-settlement firms" (Nov. 16), the writer asked, "What might I be missing, that Terhar sees differently?" A number of things, apparently. First, a few facts. The nonprofit credit counseling operations that he refers to are completely unaffected by this bill and will continue to operate in Ohio as they currently do. These operations are generally used by people who can afford to pay their credit card debt but need much more time to do so. The nonprofit credit card counseling operators do charge an upfront fee and a monthly service charge.

Debt-settlement companies usually work with people who have much larger unsecured debts that they may never be able to repay. Our bill is based on the new regulations from the Federal Trade Commission on debt-settlement companies that require that no upfront fee or any other fee may be charged to the consumer by the debt-settlement company until the consumer accepts the debt-settlement company's proposed settlement. The competition referred to in Chrissie Thompson's Enquirer article is between rival debt-settlement companies, not between the nonprofit credit counseling companies and the debt-settlement companies. These entities serve different client bases.

As stated, this law is based on Federal Trade Commission guidelines, has a joint sponsor (Rep. Dale Mallory, D-West End) and has been referred by a House Standing Committee with a bipartisan majority vote for consideration by the entire House. My special interests are those young families overburdened with massive credit card debt who need the protection of state law to avail themselves of a debt-settlement process rather than the much more dire consequence, personal bankruptcy.

Lou Terhar, state representative,

Ohio House 30th District

Awful judgment on part of The Enquirer

In response to Cliff Radel's article regarding people who panhandle ("Are beggars bugging you on streets Downtown?" Nov. 16), there are better ways to address panhandling, homelessness, addictions, poverty, etc., in our city. Quoting someone (a police captain) who refers to human beings as "bears" is not one of those. Encouraging people to not look other human beings in the eye is not one of those ways. Perpetuating an "us vs. them" mentality against those who struggle with poverty and addiction was awful judgment on the part of The Enquirer.

Katie Moroski, Downtown

A 180-degree turn from Kennedy to Obama

In 1961 President John F. Kennedy said, "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country." Now President Barack Obama says he is sorry because he disappointed so many people who expected the government to do something for them. My old Democratic party has done a 180-degree turn.

Howard Mayers, Amberley Village ■

ADVERTISEMENT

Most Popular

Most Commented

More Headlines

Most Viewed

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

LETTERS: What about benefits to the Brown family?

Jeff Berding's guest column, 'Vote defended' (Nov. 15), gave a thorough report on the benefits Hamilton County residents received from the levy to build Paul Brown Stadium.